- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Man Shoots AR-15 Against His Nose To Show How Little Kick It Has
Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:19 am to slackster
Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:19 am to slackster
quote:
I still don't see the logic in this argument. "We're not going to do anything about the current method most mass murders are using because they'll just find another method."
What kind of sense does that make?
so just keep "regulating" everything until nothing?
1
Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:20 am to UpToPar
quote:
Not necessarily. In a crowd like that, you can expect a single round to hit more than one person. A .223 at those distances would cleanly pass through a human body depending on where the person was hit.
Sure a few could have but it wouldn't have been many, especially once people hit the deck once the shooting started. Its still safe to say he fired at least 300 times.
Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:23 am to lsu480
When they finally release a casing count, they are going to realize they messed up the story.
One guy didn't do it. One guy isn't maintaining 90% accuracy in a night club.
If you averaged out his accuracy with the number of injured and dead, it quickly becomes apparent that unless he carried in 1k rounds pre loaded into 33 mags, there was a second shooter.
Some will say his shots resulting in injuries were his misses, but were they? With so many people being hit multiple times, they can't all have traveled theough other people first.
And before you say conapiracy theorist: most people have shite accuracy in high stress situations.
One guy didn't do it. One guy isn't maintaining 90% accuracy in a night club.
If you averaged out his accuracy with the number of injured and dead, it quickly becomes apparent that unless he carried in 1k rounds pre loaded into 33 mags, there was a second shooter.
Some will say his shots resulting in injuries were his misses, but were they? With so many people being hit multiple times, they can't all have traveled theough other people first.
And before you say conapiracy theorist: most people have shite accuracy in high stress situations.
Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:24 am to X123F45
quote:
And before you say conapiracy theorist: most people have shite accuracy in high stress situations.
it was a tightly packed club
Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:24 am to slackster
quote:
I think people could come to understand the functionality of custom AR-15s if the other side was willing to have a conversation about why they're so often used in mass murders.
So often? Maybe your only source of information is the mainstream media but handguns seem to be the most popular by far.
quote:
The problem is that pro-gun advocates are more worried about correcting people who call it an "assault rifle" than they are about having the discussion about high-capacity magazines. More often than not I hear people dismiss the entire topic because off some technicality, much like this thread. A guy puts the damn gun to his nose to prove it has little to no kick and people lose their mind over how much Americana he displayed. Someone calls it an assault rifle on the air and people flip out shouting ArmaLite. Stop doing that shite and address the actual point the other side is making.
The problem is people like you that refuse to educate yourselves. Let me clue you in kid, proper and precise terminology is critical because laws are written on the basis of precisely defined terms. "Assault rifle" is a precisely defined term in the military. "Assault weapon" is an ambiguous term that has a definition that changes depending on the whim and politics of the person using it. Just like "high-capacity magazines" is an ambiguous and arbitrarily defined term used by people, like yourself, that have a very poor technical and legal education on this topic.
Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:26 am to MSMHater
quote:
Damn fine shot in that deer pic!
Yah. Drive by deer shooting probably. Deer in the wrong hood.
Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:28 am to Clames
I'd bet most against AR-15's actually believe they are fully auto.
Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:28 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
There's really nothing special about the AR-15 that makes it effective. It looks "cool" and carries high cap. magazines.
Then high-capacity magazines should be addressed. My point in this entire thread is that if you simply dismiss the concerns of the general public because they think AR stands for assault rifle or because they think the AR-15 has a significant kick, you're going to be undone by your arrogance.
Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:30 am to slackster
quote:
Then high-capacity magazines should be addressed.
What do you mean when you say "addressed" in this context?
Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:30 am to X123F45
All of that is true. Also, I don't understand how he got past the bouncers without them seeing the rifle and all of the mags. They said he started shooting when he was in the middle of the club and a bartender said he saw him just standing there before the shooting started, weird.
Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:32 am to Salmon
quote:
it was a tightly packed club
Ever shot a bb gun into a pile of black birds as a kid?
Even aiming, you more often than not hit nothing.
There are going to be bullets in the ceiling, bullets high on the walls; if he maintaining a hugh rate a of fire, you can bet he dumped more rounds above their heads than into them.
Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:34 am to Clames
quote:
So often? Maybe your only source of information is the mainstream media but handguns seem to be the most popular by far.
You know what he meant by "mass murder" which was "mass shooting", he wasn't talking about LeQuan doing a drive-by on the fools who were set tripping, and AR-15s are used in almost all of the real "mass shootings".
Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:35 am to Salmon
quote:
so just keep "regulating" everything until nothing?
No. I'm suggesting you should address what capabilities - be it the AR-15 or otherwise - allowed one person to kill 49 people.
If you think that nothing should be done because something else will take its place, why don't we just deregulate fully-automatic M-60s? shite, they're a killing machine for sure, but people will use something else if you take M-60s away, so what's the point?
It should be noted that there is a difference between saying nothing "should" be done and deciding nothing "can" be done. I'm willing to have the conversation, and perhaps we settle on the fact that nothing reasonable can be done, but I'm not going to sit here and dismiss it out of hand.
Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:35 am to X123F45
quote:
Rando
your theory makes a lot of sense
I'm not usually one to break out the tinfoil, but you've made some very good points.
Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:36 am to X123F45
quote:
Ever shot a bb gun into a pile of black birds as a kid?
yes and they are able to disperse quickly, the same as a group of people out in the open
now put that pile of black birds in a box and see how many you can hit
Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:36 am to slackster
quote:
why don't we just deregulate fully-automatic M-60s?
we should
The NFA and FOPA are very unconstitutional.
Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:36 am to slackster
quote:
If you think that nothing should be done because something else will take its place, why don't we just deregulate fully-automatic M-60s? shite, they're a killing machine for sure, but people will use something else if you take M-60s away, so what's the point?
well, you see....I'm for that, so...
Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:42 am to Clames
quote:
The problem is people like you that refuse to educate yourselves. Let me clue you in kid, proper and precise terminology is critical because laws are written on the basis of precisely defined terms. "Assault rifle" is a precisely defined term in the military. "Assault weapon" is an ambiguous term that has a definition that changes depending on the whim and politics of the person using it. Just like "high-capacity magazines" is an ambiguous and arbitrarily defined term used by people, like yourself, that have a very poor technical and legal education on this topic.
This is a perfect example of what I was discussing. The arrogance of some pro-gun advocates is just as frustrating as the anti-gun side. You're more caught up in semantics than you are addressing the point from the other side.
quote:
So often? Maybe your only source of information is the mainstream media but handguns seem to be the most popular by far.
I should have been more clear, you're right. Semi-automatic rifles are prevalent in most of the mass shootings with high fatalities (8 or more).
Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:42 am to slackster
quote:
nothing should be done because something else will take its place, why don't we just deregulate fully-automatic M-60s? shite, they're a killing machine for sure, but people will use something else if you take M-60s away, so what's the point?
There were people on here last week arguing that citizens have the right to own nukes, chemical weapons and any viral weapon available to the government and they were 100% serious!
When I told them they sounded like crazy people if they really believed anyone should be able to buy weaponized Anthrax I got only downvotes.Posted on 6/22/16 at 11:43 am to slackster
quote:
You're more caught up in semantics than you are addressing the point from the other side.
It is not semantics when it comes to actually writing laws into the books
that was his point
Page 7 of 13
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News